Sentence examples for the measures were compared from inspiring English sources

The mean scores on the measures were compared across the stages of chronicity using Pearson Correlation Coefficients.

When a series of models including different combinations of the measures were compared by using likelihood ratio tests, all three measures of physical capability were found to improve model fit, and a model including all three measures produced the highest estimate of predictive ability (Harrell's C index 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 0.77).

The measures are compared with noiseless image, and minimal differences are there.

Responsiveness of the measures was compared with the effect size (with ≥ 0.8 being considered large).

Larger range increases the ICC, independent of the actual differences between the measures being compared.

However, an RV may differ from the null value of 1 because of the random error in the absence of "true" differences among the measures being compared.

QLS measure subscores and SF-36 factor scores were compared between Early Responder and Early Non-responder groups using an analysis of covariance model that included baseline score of the measure being compared, investigator, and responder status.

In general, there are two ways that validity is assessed: criterion validity, in which the measure is compared against a 'gold standard' and construct validity, in which expectations about how a measure should behave are hypothesised and tested (Guyatt, 1999).

The pre- and postoperative levels of the outcome measures were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

The prevalences for the five measures were compared between MZ and DZ twins and between boys and girls.

The CVR measures were compared over healthy tissue, infarcted tissue and the peri-infarct tissue, both sub-acutely (∼2 weeks) and chronically (∼4 months).